Cessna vs. Piper
 

G'Day to all

This is the great debate of the sky.....just like Ford vs Holden for u land lovers.

Which is the better aircraft maker??
:confused:

I want to hear what u think about how they handle, performance, pilot satisfaction etc...

The floor is yours:cool:

Oh please....the reply is obvious...

(they dont call me piper girl for nothing :D )

Hate it when my students decide to fly in the 150. Then again maybe I just hate 150's, dont mind the 182 and upwards so much. But give me a Comanche any day. Please. Anyone??? :p

You're on dangerous ground there SKC - you just KNOW that our good ol' mate gaunty will want to put in his 2 cents worth! :D Tho, knowing him, it'll look more like 2 dollars worth! :p

Anyway, to answer the question for the record, Cessna Capt, neither! Just wait until you've flown a Beechcraft Super Kingair, coz you'll be wanting to change yer username for sure! :D

Hmmm I've owned a C185, great machine, and I currently own a Bonanza which I hardly ever get to fly because it lives in Oz and I'm in Singapore...I haven't even seen it in the flesh for over a year:(

But I hate Pipers...with the exception of the Cub.

Chuck.

Cessna vs Piper, who is the best manufacturer? Well how do you define that? Piper, in their manufacturing process, zinc chromate all their skins, even where you can't see. With Cessna it is a factory option. The interior finish of a Piper is usually superior to a Cessna. However it stops right there. Piper has structual Xwind limits on a lot of their aircraft due to the fact that they attach gear to main spars instead of secondary spars. Piper has sgnificant payload vs fuel load constraints. Model for equivalent model , Cessna produce a more capable and profitable aircraft. All Cessna's with the possible exception of the C177 Cardinal series will always please the accountant with their mission capability, and subsequent cost of maintenance. Compare a Cessna 206 vs a Cherokee Six, a C402 vs a Navajo, a Titan vs a Chieftain. even a 150 vs a Tomohawk or a c172 vs a Cherokee. Compare the used prices of the above, C206 = $200K +, PA32 = $ 85K PA23 Aztec $85K vs C310R $250K+, C404 $450K, PA31-350= $300K, C402 $250K, PA31-310 = $175K. These figures tell us something. If you want a better built plane for private non revenue, buy a Piper, cheap to buy but with lots of limitations that probably wont affect a private owner. If you need to make money with it, the resale figures are definitely spelling out something. You make money with range,payload and field performance, all cumulative. Why does a 20,000hr Titan command $1/2 Million and a low hour Chieftain $300K ?. Is there a more profitable aircraft flying than a C207? can you buy one for love or money? How easy is it to find a C206 or C210 to get some experience in? You can't coz they're all out making someone big bucks. Yes, Piper probably makes a better plane, but they can't please the bean counters.

Since Cessna have seven fan jets in their corporate fleet and piper has just one turbo-prop, a single at that, I don't think there is any contest...unless you are comparing relics. If that is the case why not compare the XK Falcon with the EJ Holden...Nah, thats history, lets not go there!

Mainframe:
I think your a little bit harsh to compere a Titan to a Chieftain after all the Titan is a much bigger machine. Are there any other piston twins the same size as a Titan.:mad:

The Chieftain is really to be compared to the 402C, if you fit the after market mods to each aircraft then they become very compared able in mission ability.

For instance a PA31-350 with a VG kit and Red Leg kit that has been put on a severe diet (and put new avionics in it) can carry 900kg over 200nm. A 402C in the same layout without the red legs can only carry 835 kg. They basically balance out, the PA31 feels like more of a truck but I feel the 402 is more of a pilots aircraft.... Now ya can't beat the 402 nose locker where you can put 10 tonne and it fits plus the wing lockers you never really need to worry about frieght in the cabin...

Now on the price a low hour PA31-350 for $300k show me I want to buy it now!!!!! I think you will find you have to spend closer to $500k plus for a goodie. Titans are coming down in $$$ as they all seem to have over 20,000 hours...

What about comparing the genuine Ford V Holden, Baron 58 v's C310R- same speed, same fuel flow, load wise the 310 with a VG kit eats the B58, engineers seem to hate Barons and pax seem to hate 310's so????? But I love Barons???

Now what about a what if... How about building a hybrid 402/PA31 or B58/310R mmm a 58 with a big nose locker!!!

:confused: :confused: :confused:

Having flown a lot of time in C210's and a bit in C206's, the best single engine aeroplane, without doubt, would have to be the Bonanza. On the multi-engine side of things I would say the Baron is so much more a pilots machine than a C310.

But I'll take a job flying just about anything (like so many of us).:)

Cessna v Piper :confused: :confused: :confused: :p


Of which of the three or four different resurrections of the Piper companies are you talking?
Piper did themselves in after the Lock Haven floods, oh, back in '72 I think it was.
They make a good MBA project on how not to do it.

A C310RII with a BE58 cabin entry, so the pax (or freight-loaders)don't have to climb up seven stories then crawl down between the seat rows, and again to get out, would be the ultimate light-loader.

C404 vs PA31-350? I don't think so. C411 vs Chieftain maybe..... C402 vs PA31-310 might be closer to the mark.

Jamair,

Is that a C310R mod or is it standard???

Also I reckon:-

C402B v PA31-310/325, Navajo wins.
C402C v PA31-350, close one.
C310R v BE58, load wise 310, pax wise B58.
C404 v ???
C421 v PA31-350P

There are many pros and cons for each type. Realistically though ya can't beat a PA31-350 with the VG kit and Red Leg kit, likewise a C402C with VG kit and or Scimitar Prop conversion.

C310R with VG kit can carry way more than a B58...

Question why doesn't a VG kit increase MTOW on a B58? is it to do with the wing? Again why does a VG kit give a C310R a large increase yet a C402B a small increase. By far the VG kits seem to be unbelieveable for the 402C and PA31 with around a 300lb increase.....

Oh I don't reckon ya can beat a C182 for good clean fun...

HA

The Never Ending Argument
 

What should have been/should be done, is build a Pressurised C404 with P & W PT6A-34's and a FL30 + ceiling, Winglets, 4 Bladed Q Tips, Interior would be crew of Pilot & Co-Pilot + 14 Pax High Density and 8 Pax Dual Club Corporate Configuration .....Fit it out with Dual Garmin GNS530's coupled to an S-TEC 60, WRX1000 Stormscope with RDR1300 Radar Interface, Pilot & Co-Pilot Sandel ST3400's , with Dual Caliper - 4 Piston Cleveland Braking System, Crew & Cargo Door, Top TAS of 265kts, TOD of 1000m at Sea Level, 500 lbs/hour fuel burn, 1000ltr capacity, purchase price under USD$1m......dream on.......it's what I refer to as the mythical aircraft

Jamair.....If my poor old failing memory doesn't crash completely, I do believe what you refer to is a Check This Out For It's Age.....ie; a Cessna 310 with Double Doors :D :D

AWE Nasa you were getting me all excited then.

Anyone checked out www.eclipseaviation.com what a machine...

HA

p.s. Whats the problem with wanting everything for nothing...

:eek:
Jeez, a gen-u-ine C320 Skynight with pax doors, well buggame as the choirboy said to the Anglican priest! That is an OLD aeroplane! There is a more recent example at AF doing survey work I think, but no double doors on that one.

There's one advertised as a fixer-upper project in the AvTrader - 'for a LAME', for only $50K - cost another $180K for 2 x TSIO-540's, $50K for a decent avionics stack, $20K + for P&I, $40K for some props.........

Where can I buy me one of those Nasa-birds...........:D

Agreed High Altitude ... if that Eclipse gets off the ground in the next year or two then all this arguing will be more like comparing horse drawn carts ... and the market will absolutely collapse for used PA31 / C421 / whatever piston twin takes your fancy ... what a weapon that thing is :D

NASA

Where do I send the deposit.

HH.

Sorry, in my haste I forgot to add, MUST BE FAR 25 CERTIFIED…..just for you gaunty :D :D

You would be surprised just how many times someone has described that exact same aircraft to me and said can you get me one just like that :eek: :eek: …..maybe it’s just me, but I can’t understand why someone hasn’t designed an aircraft with those parameters, or close to it.

Jamair….If memory serves, the aircraft you refer to at AF has not seen the dizzy heights for over 10 years!!!

HH….I can give you the account number for my Camen Island account if you like :D :D

HA…..Very nice aircraft I agree, and if it does come to fruition, it will put the new B58’s etc out of business, but will not fill the void created by the need to have a pax carrying aircraft over 6 bums…..

here's that dream cessna for you NASA Conquest

AH-HA, it finally happened; I got one up on Nasa!!!

The C320 at AF might not be there now, but it sure was in 1999, along with its stablemate a V35 Bonza. It was parked in the last row next to the Hempels crowd.

How would a B350 shape up in comparison to the Nasa-Bird? Too thirsty?

The Eclipse would sure fill the BE58 role - as would perhaps a TBM700 and even the Meridian, and the Campervan will probably be the eventual PA31/C400 replacement. PC12 et al will be the corporate choice to replace the C90/B200.

Still can't convince any Aust financier that a new single turbine is a better pick than a 20 year old piston twin or an antique Kingair/Cheyenne..... ah well.:rolleyes:

Throttle
You beat me to it. Conquest 11 a legend in its own time.

I think I still hold the record for Perth-Coolangatta FL 330-350 (avge wind +35) non stop at 6+10 arriving over Cooly with fuel for Sydney with reserves intact. B200 can't get even moderately close to that.
I have even been westbound Syd Per non stop many times going easy.
In practical terms there is no such thing as long range v high speed cruise, 290 KTAS any way you wanna do it.
Only problem was I had too many cups of coffee the toot was too far down the back and I ran out of coffee jars.:D

nasa
They already built the aircraft you describe and its called a Conquest 11. They really did try the PT6s on it, but could not get any where near the performance or payload range they were looking for and in any event the Garrett is a much much better more efficient engine. Why you would want to torture the air by making it go around no less than 3 x 180s before you let it out to play escapes me just for the moment.:D


King Air B200 = Dinosaur :cool:
C-90 = only just post Big Bang.:p